Jump to content

Most Liked Content

#377941 Rules Vs. Principles

Posted by 2bLikeJesus on 24 June 2014 - 07:55 PM

I was out soul winning, door knocking in the area when someone who answered the door stated "I have heard of your church, you guys are the one's with all those rules."  I looked at him genuinely confused and said "we don't have ANY rules."   He said, "then why do you guys dress so different, and you don't drink, go dancing, go to movie theaters, or party like normal folks, and you go to church like several times a week?"  I told him it's because of a love for God and what he has done for us.  We find principles in His word that indicates what would be most pleasing to Him and out of love we do all we can to please Him.  You don't have to do ANY of those things to attend our church, that would make them rules that must be followed.  You don't need to follow any of those things to be saved either and on your way to heaven.  I then got the chance to explain a non-works salvation to him.


A person who needs rules, doesn't understand principles.


Galatians 5:18 (KJV)
18  But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.  If you are truly led of the Spirit, the Spirit will NEVER lead you to do anything that is contrary to God's will and Word, there is no need for the law. 


Rules are neccesary for a heart away from God.


Galatians 3:19a (KJV)
19  Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions


1 Corinthians 6:12 (KJV)
12  All things are lawful unto me [the Law], but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any [the Principle].


 1 Corinthians 10:23 (KJV

23  All things are lawful for me [the Law], but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not [the Principle]. 


The law makes nothing perfect.  Hebrews 7:19 (KJV

19  For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God. 


The law was not made for righteous men.  1 Timothy 1:8-10 (KJV

8  But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;
9  Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10  For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine; 


Galatians 3:24 (KJV)
24  Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 


So many people, especially IFB's who have been raised since children in an IFB church, have no idea WHY we have the standards we do.  Until they understand that a standard is simply a self-imposed boundary set to help us keep a conviction that was formed by understanding a principle from God's word.  You first find a principle in God's word, and from that principle you form a conviction, and then a standard is set by yourself to help you keep that conviction. Because of this, some standards are entirely yours alone.  For instance, I will not allow myself to own a boat.  There is absolutely nothing wrong or sinful about boat ownership, but for me, outdoor recreation is a huge draw and I am weak enough to it ( "I will not be brought under the power of any"), that my ministry for God is hurt by it. Until people have standards put IN them by understanding the principles behind them, instead of ON them because "that's just the way we do things" they will never have them for their own and it is easy for them to backslide as soon as they are out of the house.  


Bro. Garry

In His will.  By His power.  For His glory.


#376513 Discussions & "debates" In Which I Would Like To Engage

Posted by BroMatt on 12 June 2014 - 04:34 PM

In that past we have had discussion where only certain members that wanted to can post in.
We did this for an atheist one time, it was not ""freestyle" but was done in a debate style and one could post at his/her convenience. We had rules that the "debaters" had to follow and everyone followed the rules and it went very smoothly.

Everyone could view the discussion. I guess it could be done again.

#370588 What Advice Do You Have Or Same-Sex Couples

Posted by Standing Firm In Christ on 21 April 2014 - 02:31 PM

In God's eyes, they are not married... Even if another state performed the ceremony.

As to letting them join the Church, a definite no. Unless of course, they separate and repent of their wickedness.

#373334 What Will Your Church Do When The Gay Movement Knocks...

Posted by John81 on 18 May 2014 - 04:52 PM

At the moment there is no law saying a church must grant membership to any particular person. There are also no current laws that force a pastor to marry anyone.


Our churches by-laws are clear with regards to the biblical requirements for membership and the discretion of the pastor to determine if those conditions are met. Similar is set forth regarding matters of marriage.


If there comes a time when laws are enacted that would force such, our church and pastor has already determined to stand in accord with Scripture, even if that means losing State sanction to "legally" marry folks. The same is true regarding the issue of weddings held at the church.


Having already established our position in these areas on the grounds of Scripture, we don't worry about what will come to pass for we are prepared. Will the government do more to us than was done to Paul? If God's grace was sufficient for Paul in all things and he was able to be content in all things, surely we can face what the future holds.

#367742 On One Of Them Most Holy Days...

Posted by 2bLikeJesus on 30 March 2014 - 03:04 PM

We had a first time visitor come forward at the invitation to be saved...and then his wife came forward about 30 seconds later...then one by one both his two teenage kids.  The entire family got saved today!  Now THAT was the first grand slam this season! 


Bro. Garry

#364879 Salvation

Posted by Bro K on 10 March 2014 - 12:00 PM

After many years of people praying for him; my brother-iin-law accepted Christ as his Savior last night!!!!  :clapping: :clap: 

#399497 Hypocrites

Posted by No Nicolaitans on 23 January 2015 - 09:05 AM

So I was wondering...


My understanding is that both UCLA and Duke universities have played the Muslim call to prayer publicly on their campuses...so...where is the outcry and the outrage from the atheists, ACLU, Freedom from Religion Foundation, et al. Seems to me that non-muslims were forced to listen to this "call to prayer". Isn't that right up the ACLU's alley...fighting against "forcing" your religion on others?


These anti-religion folks jump at the chance to attack Christianity; however, when it comes to standing against a religion that might cut their heads off...they're amazingly quiet and obligatory.  :scratchchin:


So...the problem isn't religion; it's Christianity (as we already know). Now that my friend is...hypocrisy. 

#396542 Concerning Daniel 9:24-27

Posted by Pastor Scott Markle on 09 December 2014 - 10:06 AM

(Note:  This posting is somewhat lengthy; however, those who generally follow my posts will not find this to be much of a surprise.)


Concerning Daniel 9:24-27 –


“Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.”


As the context of Daniel 9 reveals, this prophetic utterance was delivered unto Daniel, who had been confessing the sins of his people Israel and praying for the Lord’s mercy upon his people Israel.  Indeed, when the angel Gabriel delivered this prophetic utterance unto Daniel, he specifically indicated that the focus of its revelation concerned Daniel’s people Israel and Daniel’s holy city, Jerusalem, as per the opening line of verse 24 – “Seventy weeks are determined upon thy [that is – Daniel’s] people and upon thy [that is – Daniel’s] holy city [Jerusalem].”  Furthermore, the angel revealed that these “seventy weeks” were determined by the Lord God upon Daniel’s people, the Israelites, and upon Daniel’s holy city, Jerusalem, for a six-fold purpose as signaled by the six infinitive phrases that complete verse 24. 


This six-fold purpose of the Lord our God concerning Daniel’s people, the Israelites, and Daniel’s holy city, Jerusalem, are as follows:


1.  “To finish the transgression” – Herein the word “transgression” is singular, indicating that it refers unto the entire rebellion of the Israelites against the Lord their God as a single unit of sinful fault.  Indeed, the Hebrew word that is translated by the English word “transgression” indicates a breaking away (or, departure) from a relationship or covenant with another.  Thus these “seventy weeks” are determined by the Lord God in order to bring about a completion to the sinful departure of the Israelites away from Him.  As such, we could expect that after these “seventy weeks” are concluded, the Israelites will never again depart from the Lord.


2.  “To make an end of sins” – Herein the word “sins” is plural, indicating that it refers unto the individual activities of sin that the Israelites might commit against the Lord their God.  Thus these “seventy weeks” are determined by the Lord God in order to bring about a completion to the sinful activities of the Israelites against Him.  As such, we could expect that after these “seventy weeks “ are concluded, the Israelites will never again commit sins against the Lord.


3.  “To make reconciliation for iniquity” – Herein the word “reconciliation” indicates the ideas of atonement and forgiveness and of reconciliation thereby.  Thus these “seventy weeks” are determined by the Lord God in order to bring about His forgiveness upon the Israelites for their sinful departure from Him and for their sinful activities against Him, and to bring about thereby the reconciliation of the Israelites unto Himself and unto His blessed fellowship.


4.  “To bring in everlasting righteousness” – Herein the phrase “everlasting righteousness” reveals the spiritual condition into which the Lord God intends to bring the Israelites through His work of reconciliation.  He intends to bring them into a spiritual condition of “everlasting righteousness,” not into a condition of righteousness from which they might again fall, but into a condition of righteousness from which they will never fall again.  Indeed, this is the spiritual condition into which the Lord God will bring the Israelites at the completion of these “seventy weeks.”


5.  “To seal up the vision and prophecy” – This phrase appears to indicate that all of the Lord’s prophetic utterances concerning the Israelites (especially concerning His judgments upon the Israelites) will be brought to their conclusion through the completion of these “seventy weeks.”


6.  “To anoint the most Holy” – Herein the phrase “the most Holy” refers to the Most Holy One, the promised Messiah of Israel.  According to the New Testament Scriptures, we learn that this Most Holy One, that the Messiah, is the Lord Jesus Christ Himself.  Thus these “seventy weeks” are determined by the Lord God in order to bring about the literal anointing of the Lord Jesus Christ as King of kings and Lord of lords over all the earth.  As such, we could expect that the literal return of our Lord Jesus Christ as King of kings and Lord of lords (See Revelation 19) will occur at the completion of these “seventy weeks.”


Now, in this context the phrase “seventy weeks” may be literally understood as “seventy sevens,” wherein the English word “weeks” is employed for the idea of “sevens.”  The reason that the English word “weeks” is so employed is because a week is the most natural grouping of seven when we encounter the element of time sequences.  However, the Hebrew idea of “sevens” is not limited only to a group of seven days, but can refer to any grouping of sevens within the sequence of time.  With this understanding in mind, we move to verse 25, wherein greater detail is revealed concerning the first sixty-nine of these “seventy weeks” (or, seventy sevens).


The opening portion of verse 25 reveals that the first sixty-nine of these “seventy weeks” will encompass the time period “from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince.”  Thus these first sixty-nine sevens will begin with “the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem” after their seventy years of captivity by the hand of the Babylonians (See Ezra & Nehemiah).  Thus also these first sixty-nine sevens will conclude with the coming of “the Messiah the Prince.”  Now, the distance of time between these events are known by historical record to be greater than a period of sixty-nine literal weeks.  Rather, we understand by the historical record that the distance of time between these events encompassed a multitude of years (indeed, 483 years).  Therefore, we are brought to understand that the “seventy sevens” of this context are a reference unto seventy groupings of seven years each.


Now, the report of verse 25 is not presented with a simple designation of threescore (sixty) and nine “weeks” (sevens), but with the dividing of two parts, the first being “seven weeks” (seven sevens) and the second being “threescore and two weeks” (sixty-two sevens).  This seems to indicate that something of significance will also occur at the completion of the first “seven weeks” (or, forty-nine years) of these sixty-nine weeks (sevens).  Even so, the closing line of verse 25 appears to reveal what this “thing” of significance is – “The street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.”


Since verse 25 has recorded the beginning and the ending for the first sixty-nine “weeks” of the “seventy weeks,” we would now logically expect verse 26 to report the events of the seventieth and final “week” of these “seventy weeks.”  Indeed, human logic would move us to expect that the seventieth and final “week” of these “seventy weeks” would follow immediately after the first sixty-nine “weeks” are completed (since the number seventy does follow immediately after the number sixty-nine).  However, this seventieth and final “week” of these “seventy weeks” is not actually and specifically mentioned until verse 27.  Rather, verse 26 gives a report concerning events that occur “after” the “threescore and two weeks” (after the first sixty-nine “weeks”) without making any specific reference to the seventieth and final week.


What then are these events that occur after the first sixty-nine “weeks” (483 years), without any specific indication that they fall in the seventieth and final “week” (7 years)?  Verse 26 appears to give report concerning three things, saying, “And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.”  Herein the preposition “after” does not indicate that these things occur at the end of the first sixty-nine “weeks” (483 years), but indicates that these things occur after the first sixty-nine “weeks” (483 years) are already concluded.  Furthermore, it is worthy of notice that verse 25 did not specifically state that the first sixty-nine “weeks” would conclude with the cutting off of the Messiah the Prince.  Rather, verse 25 simply indicated that the first sixty-nine “weeks” would extend “unto the Messiah the Prince” (and thereby conclude), without specifying the activity of the Messiah the Prince to which it was referring.  (Personally, I believe that verse 25 is referring to the beginning of our Lord Jesus Christ’s earthly ministry as initiated by His baptism.)


So then, what are the three things which verse 26 indicates occur after the conclusion of the first sixty-nine “weeks” (483 years)? 


1.  The Messiah will be cut off in death, not for His own sake, but for the sake of others.  According to the New Testament Scriptures, this would be a prophetically reference unto the crucifixion of our Lord Jesus Christ upon the cross. 


2.  “The people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city [that is – Daniel’s holy city, Jersusalem, as per the contextual statement with which verse 24 began] and the sanctuary [that is – the temple in Jerusalem].”  Now, in this statement there are two elements of information that are worthy of notice in relation to the context.  The first of these elements of information is that there is “a prince that shall come” unto the Israelites and unto the city of Jerusalem who is not referenced as their Messiah.  The second of these elements of information is that this “prince that shall come” is not the one himself who comes against Jerusalem in the event of verse 26 to destroy the city and the sanctuary (temple) therein.  Rather, it is the people of which he will be a part that come against Jerusalem in the event of verse 26 to destroy the city and the sanctuary (temple) therein.


3.  “The end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.”  This statement appears to indicate that the destroying of the city Jerusalem and of the temple in Jerusalem will end with utter desolation upon the Israelites, and that the Israelites and the city of Jerusalem will continue to suffer ongoing desolations thereafter.


Finally, with verse 27 we come to the concluding verse of this prophetic utterance and to the specific reference unto the seventieth and final “week” (7 years) of these “seventy weeks.”  The opening line of this verse indicates that some “he” will “confirm” some “covenant with many” (apparently among the Israelites, since that is the focus of this prophetic utterance as per the opening statement of verse 24).  In fact, this “he” will “confirm” this “covenant” with these Israelites for a period of “one week” (that is – a period of one seven, or of seven years).  Then this verse indicates that in the middle of this seven year period (after 3.5 years), this “he” will “cause the sacrifice and oblation” of the Israelites “to cease” (apparently ending his seven year “covenant” with the Israelites).  Finally, this verse indicates that this “he” will bring a form of desolation upon the Israelites and the city of Jerusalem, and that this “he” will do so for the purpose of “the overspreading of abominations” upon the Israelites and the city of Jerusalem.  Indeed, this verse indicates that this desolation will continue upon the Israelites and the city of Jerusalem “until the consummation” (until the completion) of the seventieth “week,” and thereby of the “seventy weeks.”


So then, who is this “he” of verse 27?  Grammatically, the closest antecedent to this pronoun in the context is “the prince that shall come” who was mentioned in verse 26.  Furthermore, in the context there is no other reference to “the prince that shall come” of verse 26 in order to explain who he is and why he matters and was mentioned at all in verse 26.  As such, I would contend according to these principles of grammar and context that the “he” of verse 27 is “the prince that shall come” of verse 26.  Now, it is again worthy of note that this “prince” is not referenced in verse 26 as being the Messiah, but that he is in some way related to the people who would destroy the city of Jerusalem and the sanctuary (temple) therein in the destroying event that is prophesied in verse 26.


In conclusion, let us consider the grammatical and contextual gap that is presented in this passage between the conclusion of the sixty-nine “weeks” and the beginning of the seventieth “week.”  Verse 25 clearly speaks concerning the beginning and conclusion of the first sixty-nine “weeks,” and verse 27 clearly speaks concerning the beginning of the seventieth “week.”  However, the events of verse 26 are presented between these other two records.  Indeed, as we have already noted, verse 26 does specifically indicate that the events which it records occur after the sixty-nine “weeks.”  Yet verse 26 makes no specific reference whatsoever to the seventieth “week.”  Furthermore, verse 27 specifically makes reference to the beginning of the seventieth week, and then reports concerning events that will proceed from that point.  Yet verse 27 does not specifically indicate that the events which are recorded in verse 26 are included in that seventieth “week.”  As such, we may understand from the flow of the grammar and the context that there is some form of gap in time between the first sixty-nine “weeks” (483 years) as recorded in verse 25 and the seventieth and final “week” (7 years) as recorded in verse 27, and that the events of verse 26 will fall within that gap in time.

#384038 Wow, God Is Really Serious About This

Posted by Li Bai Jia on 26 August 2014 - 07:45 PM

A few days ago a couple of people stopped by the church on their way to work. They had to walk and it was very hot even at that time of morning. They had run out of water in the one water bottle they had and just wanted to refill it with cold water. I let them refill it it from the jug in the refrigerator and then gave them some money. It wasn't a lot of money, but it was enough for them to buy another jug of water and lunch for the two of them. 


Both the man and woman were wearing dirty clothes and had betel nut (type of chewing tobacco) stained teeth and mouths, I could have very easily just told them I had no cold water available and not given them any money since they didn't ask for any(and assuming they might just spend it on more betel nut at the shop at the end of the block). But what kind of testimony would that have been? How would I have shown them the love of God by ignoring them? Will they ever return to the church for a service because I showed kindness? I have no idea. Would God have punished me if I had ignored them? Will God bless me for helping them? Again I don't know, and it really doesn't matter. We shouldn't do something because we expect to be blessed if we do it or fear punishment if we don't. We should do it because it's right. Probably nothing more will happen than peace in your heart for doing the right thing, but that should be enough. 


As Christians we should have a deep desire to help those who are struggling. It should be second nature. We shouldn't have to be commanded to do every little thing, and especially not something so basic like helping widows, orphans, the homeless, etc... Although I think God has made it abundantly clear over and over again throughout the Bible that we should do these things. God doesn't change. If he was serious about helping widows and orphans in the OT, he is still serious about it today.

#365866 Taught By Whom?

Posted by DaveW on 17 March 2014 - 02:58 AM

I get sick of people who revert their argument to "you were obviously taught that" whenever someone disagrees with them.

The claim of Darby gets thrown around here from time to time, as does the Claim of Ruckman, or Calvin.

Now there is nothing wrong with pointing out an alignment of teaching, but using it as an argument in itself is not valid.

For myself, I never went to a big Bible college anywhere, and all my instructors were and are working Pastors, not classroom intellectuals.
I never heard of Ruckman until after I was in the ministry.
I never heard of Darby until I joined this site.
I never knew anything about Scofield for many years, apart from that his name was on a Bible.
I didn't know much about Spurgeon apart from reading some of his sermons.

For many years due to having a full time job and trying to pastor as well as having a young family my preaching study was entirely from the Bible, for the pure reason that I did not have the time to consult commentaries or other pastors.
If I didn't understand something, I wouldn't preach it - even at times saying to the people that I don't understand the verses so we would just miss them until I did.
It was during those years that I formed much of my doctrinal stand.
As a result my position on most things I have commented on here is the result of my own personal study of God's Word, and is not influenced by "darcalruckin" or anyone else.
There are things I don't understand and that I therefore don't engage with here.

But when I do comment it is because I have seen something in a Bible passage that disagrees with what someone here has said - not because I read it in some commentary.

So there is enough of my history to show that I do not follow after any man.
If what I teach aligns with a man, then maybe in that item he also is Biblical, in spite of whatever else that man may teach.

And, to finish, I am just a man. What I believe to be Biblical will be influenced by all sorts of things.
I hope that if something I currently stand on is not Biblical that I can learn.

But throwing unfounded accusations will not make me listen to you.

Show me from the Bible - but don't expect me to blindly follow what you say either.
I will check it against the Bible, and if it doesn't fit, I will throw it away with the rest of the rubbish.

Yours sincerely,


#353185 Gift Of Tongues

Posted by Left the Bldg on 12 December 2013 - 04:25 PM

I'm curious: what caused you to turn? After all, the big stumbling block for many is that they have experienced it, thus, it MUST be real, they believe. It must be difficult to have to admit to having been duped for so long. I applaud your willingness to break away.

I guess I realized that not everything we experience is from God.  So rather than base my belief on that experience, I put my belief in what the Bible says about it.

#331272 For Soulwinners Only

Posted by Moved_On on 01 June 2013 - 01:17 PM

If you’re a soulwinner, I’d like to give you an honest thank you.


When you knock on someone’s door or strike up a conversation with the intent to witness them, you never know what circumstances have been taking place in that person’s life leading up to that moment.


In the early 90s, a soulwinner knocked on my door. He witnessed to a visiting friend for 20 minutes before I came out to see what was going on (since I was cooking a meal). When I was done eating I went out to speak with him and he started on the “Romans Road” with me. I was a religious lost guy and was difficult for him in some ways. I couldn’t relate to this 19 year old “geeky Bible guy” in any way. But he was an obedient witness and stayed with me. At that time in his life, he was specifically praying for “fruit that remains.”


After 40 minutes or so, I bowed my head and asked the Lord Jesus Christ to save my soul.


I’ve been a Christian for 20 years now and I have a family that I’m raising for Christ. That soulwinner is far from a geek and is among the best friends I’ve ever had and he’s always a phone call away. The town I grew up in was a stronghold of Catholicism and I never had a real friend up to that point in my life. I look back now and can see how God was preparing me months and years ahead of that meeting with a soulwinner. I left out a lot of detail; I could go on and on.


I just wanted to let the soulwinners here know that I’m grateful for your labor in Christ. I’m grateful for all the doors you’ve had slammed in your face, grateful for your perseverance while facing opposition of all kinds, grateful that you’re doing something that takes character, grateful that you’re not on your boat fishing when it’s time to “go ye therefore.” I’m grateful more than you can really understand.


So thanks again.

#383110 Wow, God Is Really Serious About This

Posted by No Nicolaitans on 22 August 2014 - 11:48 AM

Both of these are to Israel.  Not the church of God.


Is this only for Israel?


James 4:17
Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.


What about this?


James 4:7
Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.


...or this?


James 3:8
But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.


...or maybe this?


James 5:13-14

13   Is any among you afflicted? let him pray. Is any merry? let him sing psalms.
14   Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:


Wait...don't tell me...the word church there doesn't mean THE church, does it?


What about this?


James 1:22
But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.


Now...maybe I'm wrong...I don't know...but I seem to recall that when THE church first began...it was comprised of...ISRAELITES!


Acts 2:41 & 47
41   Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.


47   Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.


But you would have me believe that James wasn't writing to THE church...he was only writing to Jews? I'm to believe that even though James was writing to saved Jewish believers...who were part of THE church, none of that applies to us today because it's only for the Jews?


I know this will sound bad, but it needs to be said...


A lot of this "right dividing" comes out of "left-field"...

#374828 Beware!devil At Work

Posted by BroMatt on 31 May 2014 - 11:25 AM

It is sad that this happens. I know pastors have it hard a lot of times because they have a church with people on all different spiritual levels. Some know hardly anything about the Bible while others are very well versed. I've had people come to me and say that they are not getting fed in church. My reply usually is, "How hungry are you?" Because when you are really hungry, anything sounds really good. :) 


I love listening to preaching and according to the Bible His Word will not return void. As long as the Word of God is getting preached and I'm letting God work in me, I will get something out of that message, no matter if a kid is preaching or a seasoned preacher.

#373187 So Where Was Baptism For Salvation In The Ot?

Posted by No Nicolaitans on 16 May 2014 - 08:29 PM

Galatians 3:11-12
11   But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith1.
12   And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.
1The section of verse 11 that I highlighted is a quote from the Old Testament (Habakkuk 2:4)...and the opening statement of verse 12 makes it clear that the law had nothing to do with faith. Therefore, the Old Testament taught/teaches that justification came through faith alone without the works of the law.
Peter understood that those from the Old Testament couldn't keep the law...
Acts 15:10
Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
Paul understood that those from the Old Testament couldn't keep the law...
Romans 9:31-33
31   But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.
32   Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;
33   As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
Verse 33 is also a quote (actually a combined quote of two verses) from the Old Testament (Isaiah 8:14 and 28:16)...the Old Testament taught/teaches justification by faith alone.
Don't stumble at the stumblingstone.

#370590 What Advice Do You Have Or Same-Sex Couples

Posted by TheSword on 21 April 2014 - 02:43 PM

Well...first I don't think it pits one sin against another because, as SFIC said, they are not married according to God's definition of marriage. While legally it may be divorce, spiritually it is a repentence from fornication. As far as the children, I would think getting changing their environment to where they see that homosexuality is not a valid lifestyle would be a good thing. Hurt feelings are meaningless when compared to the gravity of eternity. I also agree that I would not consent to letting them join the church without a divorce, separation, and complete cessation of their relationship because they would be in open and unrepentent sin and would immediately be subject to church discipline in the same manner as the incestuous man in 1 Cor 5.


Their salvation must be addressed first and that necessarily involves the acknowledgment of sin and turning away from the old lifestyle of sin and self and pursue the will of God (i.e. repentence). If they refuse to divorce and get that part of their life right then they're effectively saying they don't care what God says they're going to live how they want to live and that is not a repentent heart and is moreso self-idolatry. The bottom-line on it is that it is an extremely public sin that would make massive waves on the health of the congregation.


I would never turn them away from attending the church as guests though. Everyone should have access to the gospel and biblical preaching. 

#345724 Be Still, And Know That I Am God

Posted by TheSword on 05 October 2013 - 11:44 AM

The Lord worked in a great and powerful way in my family this week. On Wednesday morning, my wife woke me up at 4:20 AM with the words that every expectant father both fears and rejoices in: "My water broke!" Now, this was a bit early, as she was a day shy of being full term and we had already been sent home from the hospital a couple days prior with a false alarm. She yelled this delightfully frightening phrase while in the shower trying to ease her back pain and woke me out of a dead sleep. I did my best Superman impression and got changed lightning fast. I helped her out of the shower after a contraction and she went to sit on the toilet. At 4:26 I called our friend down the street to come watch our 19 month old son while we went to the hospital. my wife yelled at me again saying that we weren't going to make it to the hospital. This boy was coming NOW! At this point, my calm and collected demeanor vanished like darkness after turning on a light and I instantly became the sitcom dad, frantically running back and forth trying to call 911. Unfortunately, the operator  could not understand my hysterical "THE BABY IS COMING!!!" Another contraction came and his head was now crowning. Now I'm really panicked...I threw the phone (forgot to hang up of course) and went into full panic mode. I just wasn't prepared for this! I never expected anything like this to happen us! Truth be told, my panic was more about having to deliver the baby myself and messing up in a big way. In another instant, it sank in that I was going to have to do this; there was just no way around it. I mentally zoned in (still terrified of course). I helped my wife to the floor and leaned her back. We delivered the baby right there on our bathroom floor. A contraction came and he popped out and his head popped out; all I could see below that was umbilical cord. Our first baby had the cord wrapped around his neck and that was quick an ordeal at the hospital so I was panicking just a little bit more now. I was able to simply push it aside and off his shoulder. Two extremely short contractions later I was holding my son and the majority of the panic and anxiety was gone. Just 8 short minutes after waking, we had gone through what felt like an entire day's trial. My wife then picks up the phone and calmly explains what had just happened to the 911 operator while I checked him out and wrapped him up for Mama. The EMS got there about 20 minutes later and we went to the hospital to get everything checked out.


The baby is fine and my wife is fine: no complications or serious ailments whatsoever. Of the million things that could have gone wrong with such a set of circumstances, not one of them did. God truly showed Himself and kept them both safe while guiding me to do what I needed to. Psalm 46 in particular came to mind after all the chaos had dissipated:


1God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble.

Therefore will not we fear, though the earth be removed, and though the mountains be carried into the midst of the sea;

Though the waters thereof roar and be troubled, though the mountains shake with the swelling thereof. Selah.

There is a river, the streams whereof shall make glad the city of God, the holy place of the tabernacles of the most High.

God is in the midst of her; she shall not be moved: God shall help her, and that right early.

The heathen raged, the kingdoms were moved: he uttered his voice, the earth melted.

The Lord of hosts is with us; the God of Jacob is our refuge. Selah.

Come, behold the works of the Lord, what desolations he hath made in the earth.

He maketh wars to cease unto the end of the earth; he breaketh the bow, and cutteth the spear in sunder; he burneth the chariot in the fire.

10 Be still, and know that I am God: I will be exalted among the heathen, I will be exalted in the earth.

11 The Lord of hosts is with us; the God of Jacob is our refuge. Selah.


God reminded me in this moment that there was no reason to panic in the first place. There was no reason to fear at all because He was still in control. With our last baby, my wife went full pre-eclamptic and we had to induce her and deliver early, he got stuck on the way out and had to be vacuumed, and he had the cord wrapped around his neck. We had been praying to have a safe, healthy, and normal pregnancy this time. I believe God answered that prayer, but not in the way we expected. He was telling us that it doesn't matter how the pregnancy goes or ends; He's still in control and holds us in His hands. "Calm down. I've got you my child" He says. God will certainly not give you more than you can handle, and will give you what you need to get through the trial. I had no false impressions on my lack of training and ability to deliver a baby (not to mention my weak stomach for blood and bodily fluids) and that's why I went into panic mode. However, when you realize that God the Almighty who created heaven and earth, who moves seas and mountains by His Word, and loves you so much He died for you is standing next to you; there's no reason to fear at all. The greatest assurance we can have on this earth is knowing that those who love and trust the Lord can depend on His provision and that regardless of the outcome, He is in control and works all things for our benefit (Rom 8:28).


How sweet to hold

A newbord baby

To feel the pride and joy he gives

But sweeter still

The calm assurance

This child can face uncertain days

Because He lives!


Because He lives

I can face tomorrow

Because He lives

All fear is gone

Because I know

He holds the future

And life is worthe the living

Just because He lives!

Attached Thumbnails

  • Jonah and Dad.jpg

#344992 Pastor Who Do You Think You Are?

Posted by Steve Schwenke on 28 September 2013 - 07:05 PM

I believe our cue comes from the Lord Jesus Christ:

Matthew 20:28 Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.


We are to SERVE and MINISTER to our congregation.  While we "rule" over them according to Heb. 13:17, it is not a dictatorial rule, it is the rule of a shepherd caring for his sheep.  A shepherd LEADS his sheep by example, and provides for them all along the way.


Other passages for consideration:

Ezek. 34 particularly v. 1-10 as an example of BAD shepherds

Jer. 23:1-4 as an example of bad shepherds

Matt. 9:36-38 for the need for shepherds


Acts 6:4 - the primary focus of the pastor's ministry - prayer and the word of God

Acts 20:17-35 - Paul's example in Ephesus

I Timothy 4:12 - Paul instructs Timothy to be a living example


The Pastor leads through the preaching and teaching of the word of God, and that preaching and teaching is confirmed by the Pastor's example in his daily life, as well as the Pastor's ministering to the needs of the flock.  He takes care of them.  A shepherd cannot drive the sheep like a cowboy drives cattle.  Sheep cannot handle that, and they end up either running away or dying.  They must be led - softly, gently, patiently.  They need to be cared for.  They need to be protected.

Too many pastors think of themselves primarily as an administrator of activities.  This is foreign to the Bible.

Too many pastors think of themselves as "the boss" who must be obeyed - or else.


Jesus Christ's observation on Israel being without a shepherd was made with COMPASSION (Mt. 9:36-38).

So, when a member is hurting, we should go pray with them and comfort them.

When a member is in the hospital, we should go visit them.

When a member is struggling with sin, we should go MINISTER to them, by patient counsel and prayer.  IN other words, we should try to HELP them get them victory, not HURT them by condemnation and pushing them out the door.


Church discipline is another matter altogether.

Hopefully you can see my point...


If I could summarize it with one word, I would say "SERVANT-LEADER"

(is that two words???)


In Christ,

#340315 Pastor’S Salary Cap

Posted by Kitagrl on 20 August 2013 - 04:28 PM

This topic is going to irritate me, since we basically live paycheck to paycheck AND I have to work a job to help make ends meet.

We have four kids and live in a parsonage and have our utilities paid, plus a salary, but the salary is definitely low enough to qualify for food stamps (although we are not on food stamps). We pay our own cell phone and most of our own gas, and bought our own cars, and pay for our own internet, etc. We also pay for Christian school.

If a church can pay a pastor enough to have a savings account and a retirement and live as comfortable as his people, then more power to that church. Amen. AMEN!!!!!

And to those who think pastors do not work to earn their salary....well I am going to leave the topic before I blow up on that one.

Honestly and frankly, what I wouldn't give some days for my husband and myself to be OUT of the ministry. Perks? Choose a church of your own choosing. Choose the ministries you are comfy with. And find a job that pays you enough to support your family that matches your talents and skills. But we are IN the ministry because God called us....and when people say things like "Pastors should work" or "Pastors are overpaid" it just makes me ANGRY.

I had my sister in law who makes six figures a year tell me it must be nice that I have a free house and utilities paid. REALLY? She'd really like to live in my parsonage from 1940 that needs tons of work that nobody can afford to do right now? She'd really like to have my bank account with little more than $100-$200 in it at any one given time?

Yeah. People who grudge pastors and their families for the sacrifices they make REALLY get me annoyed. And I'm cranky today so that makes it worse. hahaha.

I will say God provides for us and I'm thankful for it. But most people who criticize pastors would NEVER want to trade places with their family if they had to walk in their shoes and in their budget for a month. Nope.

(Oh, and yes, we generously give to our church as a good example...most likely we give a larger percentage of our income than anyone in the church, although we have never looked at the record books to find out.)

#397885 It's Here!

Posted by Salyan on 25 December 2014 - 12:26 AM

Merry Christmas, everybody! We had a lovely candlelight service tonight. One of my friends invited his coworker; she came with her sister and they both GOT SAVED! What a great birthday.

The Fundamental Top 500IFB1000 The Fundamental Top 500